Dominic Oliver1, Giulia Spada1, Craig Colling2, Matthew Broadbent2, Helen Baldwin3, Rashmi Patel4, Robert Stewart5, Daniel Stahl6, Richard Dobson7, Philip McGuire8, Paolo Fusar-Poli9. 1. Early Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom. 2. National Institute for Health Research, Maudesley Biomedical Research Centre, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 3. Early Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; National Institute for Health Research, Maudesley Biomedical Research Centre, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom. 5. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; South London and Maudsley Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 6. Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, United Kingdom. 7. National Institute for Health Research, Maudesley Biomedical Research Centre, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; Institute of Health Informatics Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Health Data Research UK London, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 8. Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; OASIS Service, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 9. Early Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; National Institute for Health Research, Maudesley Biomedical Research Centre, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; OASIS Service, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. Electronic address: paolo.fusar-poli@kcl.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Risk estimation models integrated into Electronic Health Records (EHRs) can deliver innovative approaches in psychiatry, but clinicians' endorsement and their real-world usability are unknown. This study aimed to investigate the real-world feasibility of implementing an individualised, transdiagnostic risk calculator to automatically screen EHRs and detect individuals at-risk for psychosis. METHODS: Feasibility implementation study encompassing an in-vitro phase (March 2018 to May 2018) and in-vivo phase (May 2018 to April 2019). The in-vitro phase addressed implementation barriers and embedded the risk calculator (predictors: age, gender, ethnicity, index cluster diagnosis, age*gender) into the local EHR. The in-vivo phase investigated the real-world feasibility of screening individuals accessing secondary mental healthcare at the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. The primary outcome was adherence of clinicians to automatic EHR screening, defined by the proportion of clinicians who responded to alerts from the risk calculator, over those contacted. RESULTS: In-vitro phase: implementation barriers were identified/overcome with clinician and service user engagement, and the calculator was successfully integrated into the local EHR through the CogStack platform. In-vivo phase: 3722 individuals were automatically screened and 115 were detected. Clinician adherence was 74% without outreach and 85% with outreach. One-third of clinicians responded to the first email (37.1%) or phone calls (33.7%). Among those detected, cumulative risk of developing psychosis was 12% at six-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: This is the first implementation study suggesting that combining precision psychiatry and EHR methods to improve detection of individuals with emerging psychosis is feasible. Future psychiatric implementation research is urgently needed.
BACKGROUND: Risk estimation models integrated into Electronic Health Records (EHRs) can deliver innovative approaches in psychiatry, but clinicians' endorsement and their real-world usability are unknown. This study aimed to investigate the real-world feasibility of implementing an individualised, transdiagnostic risk calculator to automatically screen EHRs and detect individuals at-risk for psychosis. METHODS: Feasibility implementation study encompassing an in-vitro phase (March 2018 to May 2018) and in-vivo phase (May 2018 to April 2019). The in-vitro phase addressed implementation barriers and embedded the risk calculator (predictors: age, gender, ethnicity, index cluster diagnosis, age*gender) into the local EHR. The in-vivo phase investigated the real-world feasibility of screening individuals accessing secondary mental healthcare at the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. The primary outcome was adherence of clinicians to automatic EHR screening, defined by the proportion of clinicians who responded to alerts from the risk calculator, over those contacted. RESULTS: In-vitro phase: implementation barriers were identified/overcome with clinician and service user engagement, and the calculator was successfully integrated into the local EHR through the CogStack platform. In-vivo phase: 3722 individuals were automatically screened and 115 were detected. Clinician adherence was 74% without outreach and 85% with outreach. One-third of clinicians responded to the first email (37.1%) or phone calls (33.7%). Among those detected, cumulative risk of developing psychosis was 12% at six-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: This is the first implementation study suggesting that combining precision psychiatry and EHR methods to improve detection of individuals with emerging psychosis is feasible. Future psychiatric implementation research is urgently needed.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lars Lau Raket; Jörn Jaskolowski; Bruce J Kinon; Jens Christian Brasen; Linus Jönsson; Allan Wehnert; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: Lancet Digit Health Date: 2020-03-26
Authors: P Fusar-Poli; M Tantardini; S De Simone; V Ramella-Cravaro; D Oliver; J Kingdon; M Kotlicka-Antczak; L Valmaggia; J Lee; M J Millan; S Galderisi; U Balottin; V Ricca; P McGuire Journal: Eur Psychiatry Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 5.361
Authors: David A Feldstein; Rachel Hess; Thomas McGinn; Rebecca G Mishuris; Lauren McCullagh; Paul D Smith; Michael Flynn; Joseph Palmisano; Gheorghe Doros; Devin Mann Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Paolo Fusar-Poli; Nomi Werbeloff; Grazia Rutigliano; Dominic Oliver; Cathy Davies; Daniel Stahl; Philip McGuire; David Osborn Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2019-04-25 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Michelle Worthington; Dominic B Dwyer; Lana Kambeitz-Ilankovic; Rachele Sanfelici; Paolo Fusar-Poli; Marlene Rosen; Stephan Ruhrmann; Alan Anticevic; Jean Addington; Diana O Perkins; Carrie E Bearden; Barbara A Cornblatt; Kristin S Cadenhead; Daniel H Mathalon; Thomas McGlashan; Larry Seidman; Ming Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Scott W Woods; Peter Falkai; Rebekka Lencer; Alessandro Bertolino; Joseph Kambeitz; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Eva Meisenzahl; Raimo K R Salokangas; Jarmo Hietala; Paolo Brambilla; Rachel Upthegrove; Stefan Borgwardt; Stephen Wood; Raquel E Gur; Philip McGuire; Tyrone D Cannon Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Leigha A MacNeill; Norrina B Allen; Roshaye B Poleon; Teresa Vargas; K Juston Osborne; Katherine S F Damme; Deanna M Barch; Sheila Krogh-Jespersen; Ashley N Nielsen; Elizabeth S Norton; Christopher D Smyser; Cynthia E Rogers; Joan L Luby; Vijay A Mittal; Lauren S Wakschlag Journal: Dev Psychopathol Date: 2021-12-07
Authors: Paolo Fusar-Poli; Christoph U Correll; Celso Arango; Michael Berk; Vikram Patel; John P A Ioannidis Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2021-06 Impact factor: 79.683
Authors: Lauren S Wakschlag; Amy L Finlay-Jones; Leigha A MacNeill; Aaron J Kaat; C Hendricks Brown; Matthew M Davis; Patricia Franklin; Cady Berkel; Sheila Krogh-Jespersen; Justin D Smith Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-04-14
Authors: Dominic Oliver; Chiew Meng Johnny Wong; Martin Bøg; Linus Jönsson; Bruce J Kinon; Allan Wehnert; Kristian Tore Jørgensen; Jessica Irving; Daniel Stahl; Philip McGuire; Lars Lau Raket; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo; Erich Studerus; Julio Vaquerizo-Serrano; Jessica Irving; Ana Catalan; Dominic Oliver; Helen Baldwin; Andrea Danese; Seena Fazel; Ewout W Steyerberg; Daniel Stahl; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 9.306